UT Pro-Palestine Protest Thread

[Mikey4 2476]

2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

If I say you can protest in this field but you cannot wear shoes, and the field volcanic is surrounded with volcanic rock, am I infringing speech? The shoes may not directly contribute to the speech, but they sure as shit make it a lot easier to do.

Yes, shoes assist in protesting for the reason you mention, and a ban on shoes would burden speech.

 

Quote

An umbrella and a tent do the same thing to differing degrees. As I said, no tent ever is pretty harsh rule. If a less restrictive measure exists that will serve the same end goal, then that is the measure that should be used.

Less restrictive measures exist and are permissible. If you need protection from the elements, then you can use an umbrella, wear a raincoat, or assemble in a covered space. If you need somewhere to sit and rest, bring a folding chair or find a bench. A tent adds absolutely nothing other than exclude people from using public space.

[Captainant 27727]

4 minutes ago, Mikey4 said:

I don't follow. I was agreeing with Nicole that people are disuaded from posting in CR and to some extent DT due to tribalism and a rush to neg rather than engage in a debate. There is certainly some good faith debate and discussion, but the extremists make it unpleasant.

In my experience, people only pick up a ton of negs when they come in hot without any supporting evidence or citation for their claims. There is certainly a belief of what you claim, but it's ironically completely supported by a mindless repetition of something that isn't quite true.

Just like how there's a weird overriding urge in this thread from some folks to call everything antisemitism and cheer on the riot cops, in spite of the objective reality before them

[SquishMitten 10425]

2 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

Why would he do that?  He'd see it as being weak and hypocritical, and he'd be right in that assessment.

For rationale adults, admitting you made a mistake and taking steps to correct it is not considered weak or hypocritical 

[Dahobbs 17655]

2 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

It's hot and humid.  Who is getting in a tent vs a canopy/shade?  It's clear why the rule was implemented.  There have been tent cities all over the city and for a school trying to attract the best & brightest, it's not the best look for visiting students vs a hypothetical about shoes and rocky ground.  

What's the difference between a tent vs a canopy? As far as UT's rules go, they appear to be the same thing and would both be prohibited. 

As to whether the rule was specifically implemented with recent events in mind, I don't know that to be the case. It seems like the tent rule pre-dated the tent city stuff, but maybe I'm wrong. Again, if we weren't talking about a public university with a statutorily designated public forum, concerns about student recruitment/retention would be a pretty fair reason for the rule. But, this is a special place with a special designation. The administration does not get to do with it what it pleases. A reasonable restriction in one context (private university land) is not reasonable in another (public forum). No tents ever is a harsh rule. Why would all of your concerns not be solved with a registration requirement? Why would @Frank Drebin's concerns not be resolved with a registration requirement? 

[Mikey4 2476]

3 minutes ago, Captainant said:

In my experience, people only pick up a ton of negs when they come in hot without any supporting evidence or citation for their claims. There is certainly a belief of what you claim, but it's ironically completely supported by a mindless repetition of something that isn't quite true.

I don't doubt that some of it is justified, but a lot of times people just neg when they see a view that's different from their own. It's also the style of discourse -- for example, attacking people with personal slurs rather than debating their positions. It's not appealing to me.

[Brisketexan 105275]

10 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

The mall is not a fucking campground.  Leave your tent at home and protest all you want.

And that's why the Governor said he was busting up the protests!  No tents!  Follow the rules!

Oh wait...that's not what he said at all.  He said, in plain language, that the protests were busted up for their content:

 

 

[Frank Drebin 5652]

Why is not allowing people to set up tents on the mall harsh?  

[bolverk 29708]

7 minutes ago, Mikey4 said:

I don't follow. I was agreeing with Nicole that people are disuaded from posting in CR and to some extent DT due to tribalism and a rush to neg rather than engage in a debate. There is certainly some good faith debate and discussion, but the extremists make it unpleasant.

I invite you to visit the Hartzell thread in CR, which discusses this very topic. It's six pages of debate/discussion/dissent, with lots of back-and-forth. Having just skimmed the entire thing just now, I counted 1 "fuck you" emoji. I'll also ask you to look at the last page, where one poster came in well over an hour ago with a flaming hot take on the current president of the US (not the university). Guess what? Not a single neg.

Here's a link if you'd like to check for yourself: https://www.surlyhorns.com/board/topic/35367-jay-hartzell-is-not-out-standard/page/6/

If you're really concerned about avoiding neg reps on this site, I'd suggest never, ever visiting the Football board.

 

[Dahobbs 17655]

6 minutes ago, Mikey4 said:

Yes, shoes assist in protesting for the reason you mention, and a ban on shoes would burden speech.

Less restrictive measures exist and are permissible. If you need protection from the elements, then you can use an umbrella, wear a raincoat, or assemble in a covered space. If you need somewhere to sit and rest, bring a folding chair or find a bench. A tent adds absolutely nothing other than exclude people from using public space.

You're confused about what "less restrictive measures" refers to. In constitutional analysis, it refers to government action, not the actions of the public, i.e., the government could choose an action less restrictive than outlawing the use of tents entirely. Here, that would be time limits and registration/reservation. Further, the solution to a problem caused by government restriction of free speech in a public forum cannot be "go someplace else". Literally, the place people are suppose to be able to go is the public forum. That said, I agree that a no tent policy isn't extremely restrictive and that so long as other government restrictions aren't in play, free speech is only marginally affected by the restriction. As I said, maybe no tents is a reasonable restriction. But because less restrictive options are available to the government, I'm not entirely sure that conclusion is obvious. 

[Dahobbs 17655]

2 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

Why is not allowing people to set up tents on the mall harsh?  

The rule is harsh because it is absolute. That is all I mean. 

[jimmyjazz 46099]

23 minutes ago, Mikey4 said:

I don't follow. I was agreeing with Nicole that people are disuaded from posting in CR and to some extent DT due to tribalism and a rush to neg rather than engage in a debate. There is certainly some good faith debate and discussion, but the extremists make it unpleasant.

Oh for fuck's sake, Nancy.

[Dahobbs 17655]

7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

And that's why the Governor said he was busting up the protests!  No tents!  Follow the rules!

Oh wait...that's not what he said at all.  He said, in plain language, that the protests were busted up for their content:

 

 

Yeah, also this. The rest of it is an interesting legal discussion. This is the primary point. 

[Mikey4 2476]

1 minute ago, bolverk said:

I invite you to visit the Hartzell thread in CR, which discusses this very topic. It's six pages of debate/discussion/dissent, with lots of back-and-forth. Having just skimmed the entire thing just now, I counted 1 "fuck you" emoji. I'll also ask you to look at the last page, where one poster came in well over an hour ago with a flaming hot take on the current president of the US (not the university). Guess what? Not a single neg.

Here's a link if you'd like to check for yourself: https://www.surlyhorns.com/board/topic/35367-jay-hartzell-is-not-out-standard/page/6/

If you're really concerned about avoiding neg reps on this site, I'd suggest never, ever visiting the Football board.

 

I'll check it, thank you. I've been posting on the football board for 6+ years, and shaggy before that, and hornfans before that. I've had no problems with negs or hostility on there.

[jimmyjazz 46099]

21 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

You can only take up so much space standing.  But setting up tents you are taking up your space and the footprint of your tent or any number of tents you care to set up.  Standing space is first come first serve.  People eventually will have to use the restroom and vacate the space.  Tents can be there indefinitely.  

Jesus Christ, have you never seen dozens and dozens of people laying out on the South Mall?  THEY'RE TAKING UP MORE THAN THEIR ALLOTED SPACE.

Come on, be a bigger pussy, I dare you.

[wildcat09 29376]

7 minutes ago, Mikey4 said:

I don't doubt that some of it is justified, but a lot of times people just neg when they see a view that's different from their own. It's also the style of discourse -- for example, attacking people with personal slurs rather than debating their positions. It's not appealing to me.

It's always funny to read posts like this then go and see the types of posts that actually get dogpiled in CR.

[Frank Drebin 5652]

Just now, Dahobbs said:

Yeah, also this. The rest of it is an interesting legal discussion. This is the primary point. 

Abbot's motivation was wrong.  He knows it.  He was going for cheap political points with his base.

[wildcat09 29376]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

Jesus Christ, have you never seen dozens and dozens of people laying out on the South Mall?  THEY'RE TAKING UP MORE THAN THEIR ALLOTED SPACE.

Come on, be a bigger pussy, I dare you.

Never dare a man to do something he's looking for justification to do.

[lucious leftfoot 126]

3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

The rest of it is an interesting legal discussion.

It is? 
 

Law school sounds terrible. 

[Frank Drebin 5652]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

Jesus Christ, have you never seen dozens and dozens of people laying out on the South Mall?  THEY'RE TAKING UP MORE THAN THEIR ALLOTED SPACE.

Come on, be a bigger pussy, I dare you.

Tents take up more space than a person.  You could literally buy and set out as many as it take to occupy the entire space.  They are not needed to protest.  They also look like shit.  It is an entirely reasonable rule.  And I am pretty damn sure a court will agree.

[Foosters 17882]

3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Yeah, also this. The rest of it is an interesting legal discussion. This is the primary point. 

This is my main beef with Hartzell - that the governor of the State publicly supported the arrests of ALL of the protestors based on the content of their message. And Hartzell just fucking sat there. THAT is the moment when a University President is supposed to lead.

[jimmyjazz 46099]

Just now, Frank Drebin said:

Tents take up more space than a person.  You could literally buy and set out as many as it take to occupy the entire space.  They are not needed to protest.  They also look like shit.  It is an entirely reasonable rule.  And I am pretty damn sure a court will agree.

Am I surprised you missed the point?  According to you, anyone taking up more than approximately 1 sq foot of space (i.e., a standing man) IS OCCUPYING SOMEONE ELSE'S SPACE!  OH NO!

People laying down on the mall should be prosecuted, full stop.  Unless they're wearing a sun dress.  And female.

[Frank Drebin 5652]

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Am I surprised you missed the point?  According to you, anyone taking up more than approximately 1 sq foot of space (i.e., a standing man) IS OCCUPYING SOMEONE ELSE'S SPACE!  OH NO!

People laying down on the mall should be prosecuted, full stop.  Unless they're wearing a sun dress.  And female.

I never said that so stop lying.  Or don't and keep beating up that strawman.

[Mikey4 2476]

5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

You're confused about what "less restrictive measures" refers to. In constitutional analysis, it refers to government action, not the actions of the public, i.e., the government could choose an action less restrictive than outlawing the use of tents entirely. Here, that would be time limits and registration/reservation. Further, the solution to a problem caused by government restriction of free speech in a public forum cannot be "go someplace else". Literally, the place people are suppose to be able to go is the public forum. That said, I agree that a no tent policy isn't extremely restrictive and that so long as other government restrictions aren't in play, free speech is only marginally affected by the restriction. As I said, maybe no tents is a reasonable restriction. But because less restrictive options are available to the government, I'm not entirely sure that conclusion is obvious. 

My point is that the *government* allows a range of alternatives that address the concerns you raise (e.g., protection from the elements) while also ensuring that  the public space will be available to others. I'm not saying they need to go somewhere else. Protest right there. You don't need a tent to do that.

[bolverk 29708]

5 minutes ago, Mikey4 said:

I'll check it, thank you. I've been posting on the football board for 6+ years, and shaggy before that, and hornfans before that. I've had no problems with negs or hostility on there.

 

4 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

It's always funny to read posts like this then go and see the types of posts that actually get dogpiled in CR.

I'm not saying negs or fatwas don't happen in the CR, but it's not nearly as commonplace as perceived. It's mostly restricted to posters persistently spouting disproven lies, stating malignant opinions as facts without evidence, or saying racist/homophobic kind of shit, just like anywhere else on this board. The difference is that, by its political nature, the CR attracts people who like to stir the pot with that stuff.

[Captainant 27727]

5 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

I never said that so stop lying.  Or don't and keep beating up that strawman.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy

[Leeroy Jenkins 2412]

2 hours ago, Skipper said:

Of all things can we leave COVID nonsense out of this thread.  JFC

He makes a good point.  There are still students on campus who wear masks to class.  That isn't nonsense.  

[Bevo 13596]

6 minutes ago, Leeroy Jenkins said:

He makes a good point.  There are still students on campus who wear masks to class.  That isn't nonsense.  

There are still students who wear masks going into the 7-11 also.

[Smax 3800]

Great pic 

 

 

stolen from reddit 😛

[jimmyjazz 46099]

How dare all those protestors steal space from normal right-thinking folks!

[Captainant 27727]

1 minute ago, Smax said:

Great pic 

 

 

stolen from reddit 😛

ARREST THAT STUDENT HE IS TAKING UP MORE GROUND SQUARE FOOTAGE THAN HE NEEDS TO AND IS BLOCKING OTHERS FROM USING THE SPACE!!!! 

 

/s

[C-Man 27254]

So much tent talk. Sheesh. Personally, I think camping tents indicate that protesters are setting up camp and plan to sleep/live there for the duration. It's not about getting out of the sun, etc. It's to antagonize. Let them set up canopies if they must but break them down or vacate them at a certain time each day. There is middle ground on this deal -- and I say that with full realization that Abbott/Hartzell and his goons may not give two-shits about finding middle ground and are reverting to fascist tendencies.

But the minute "infintada" or "pro-Hamas" shit comes up on the West Mall, this thing needs to be shut down with extreme prejudice (no head-cracking, just clearing them out peacefully) as it's no longer simply support for the innocent Palestines in Gaza. (I also say this with full-on hatred of Netanyahu and what the opportunism 10/7 has given him to -- in his mind -- eradicate as many Palestinians as he can reasonably get rid of before he's told to stand down or else.)

This is a gigantic shit sandwich and is threatening to take our collective eyes of the real (and scary) issues that our country is facing if we allow it.

[jimmyjazz 46099]

Tangentially, UT needs to water the grass.

[InkaUtexas 26072]

51 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

I have no sympathy for Hartzell and wouldn’t mind him getting run out of town, but god damn can you imagine the psycho Abbott and the regents would appoint to replace him. Meet your new university president, the Navy Seal who murdered those Iraqi civilians and Trump pardoned. 

Nah, would be some ex drone operator addicted to Mt. Dew and Skoal. Got out of the military and went to work for General Atomics as their liaison to the IAF.

[Leeroy Jenkins 2412]

7 minutes ago, Smax said:

Great pic 

 

 

stolen from reddit 😛

Picture of Zero Fucks Given

[Dahobbs 17655]

8 minutes ago, Bevo said:

There are still students who wear masks going into the 7-11 also.

Yes? 7-11 is free to restrict that if it wishes. It isn't bound by Constitutional restrictions. 

[chainsaw 9873]

Surely the kids will love Israel if they're simply forced to say nice things about it.

[Evil Bill Obrien 3293]

16 minutes ago, Captainant said:

ARREST THAT STUDENT HE IS TAKING UP MORE GROUND SQUARE FOOTAGE THAN HE NEEDS TO AND IS BLOCKING OTHERS FROM USING THE SPACE!!!! 

 

/s

I mean what is a beach towel other than a really flat tent?

 

13 minutes ago, C-Man said:

So much tent talk. Sheesh.

Was about to make a joke about this, but you beat me to tent talk...

REI stock to the moon right now tho

Edited April 30 by Evil Bill Obrien

[Captainant 27727]

30 minutes ago, C-Man said:

But the minute "infintada" or "pro-Hamas" shit comes up on the West Mall, this thing needs to be shut down with extreme prejudice (no head-cracking, just clearing them out peacefully) as it's no longer simply support for the innocent Palestines in Gaza.

To be honest, the law that abbott signed in 2019 was done so for this exact case. A no-shit white supremacist was going to speak at ATM and the student body revolted and it eventually escalated into clashes between the pro and anti fascists in attendance that the cops had to break up. In response, ATM created a policy that only university-sanctioned visitors could speak on campus from then on. 

SB18 was passed in direct response to this event.

Edit: I've linked it already but I'm sourcing from this Georgetown FSP article

Edited April 30 by Captainant

[Frank Drebin 5652]

36 minutes ago, Leeroy Jenkins said:

He makes a good point.  There are still students on campus who wear masks to class.  That isn't nonsense.  

A college-aged kid wearing a mask outdoors due to covid fears in 2024 is really a thing? 

Or do you think there might be another reason they are wearing a mask at these outdoor protests?

 

[miguelito 11291]

31 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Tangentially, UT needs to water the grass.

What if I told you there was a way to simultaneously water the grass, disperse protestors, and improve the hygiene of protestors who refuse to leave?

[Welshy 907]

30 minutes ago, Leeroy Jenkins said:

Picture of Zero Fucks Given

It's fantastic.

Also, WHY ISN'T HE PROTESTING?

[Skipper 6192]

22 minutes ago, C-Man said:

 

But the minute "infintada" or "pro-Hamas" shit comes up on the West Mall, this thing needs to be shut down with extreme prejudice (no head-cracking, just clearing them out peacefully) as it's no longer simply support for the innocent Palestines in Gaza. (I also say this with full-on hatred of Netanyahu and what the opportunism 10/7 has given him to -- in his mind -- eradicate as many Palestinians as he can reasonably get rid of before he's told to stand down or else.)

This is a gigantic shit sandwich and is threatening to take our collective eyes of the real (and scary) issues that our country is facing if we allow it.

I came across a livestream a couple of hours ago and it looked like a "pre-protest" or overall discussion was going on of some sort.   Apparently led by 2 UT profs.  All incredibly peaceful and non-disruptive (no tents!) so no issue there.  A few items stood out in the 20 mins or so I was listening (until it wrapped).   There were some jewish students listening in as well that raised their hand to engage and they were ignored.  Someone in the crowd asked if she considered Hamas a terrorist organization and she said something like I'm not answering that and moved on.  Then, the kicker, for some reason she noted that IDF forces trained the APD.  First of all - is there any truth to that?  Second, no wonder these kids show up angry.  Zero dialogue or room for discussion of alternative viewpoints and then you tell the students "the enemy" is training the APD.  For what purpose? To get them riled up?  Disappointing for a UT prof but maybe not surprising.   It then panned over to the Jewish students getting interviewed by media after this session where they expressed their concerns about some of the rhetoric (and, by the way, praising the UT administration for efforts to help make them feel safe which gets lost in all of this).  One mentioned he had politely sat down next to this professor on campus to talk to her about some of these issues, but again, refusal to engage in any discussion.   So much for the free exchange of ideas and all that.

[wildcat09 29376]

10 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

A college-aged kid wearing a mask outdoors due to covid fears in 2024 is really a thing? 

Or do you think there might be another reason they are wearing a mask at these outdoor protests?

 

Is it your claim that an N95 mask disguises someone's identity?

[royiv 9339]

1 minute ago, Skipper said:

I came across a livestream a couple of hours ago and it looked like a "pre-protest" or overall discussion was going on of some sort.   Apparently led by 2 UT profs.  All incredibly peaceful and non-disruptive (no tents!) so no issue there.  A few items stood out in the 20 mins or so I was listening (until it wrapped).   There were some jewish students listening in as well that raised their hand to engage and they were ignored.  Someone in the crowd asked if she considered Hamas a terrorist organization and she said something like I'm not answering that and moved on.  Then, the kicker, for some reason she noted that IDF forces trained the APD.  First of all - is there any truth to that?  Second, no wonder these kids show up angry.  Zero dialogue or room for discussion of alternative viewpoints and then you tell the students "the enemy" is training the APD.  For what purpose? To get them riled up?  Disappointing for a UT prof but maybe not surprising.   It then panned over to the Jewish students getting interviewed by media after this session where they expressed their concerns about some of the rhetoric (and, by the way, praising the UT administration for efforts to help make them feel safe which gets lost in all of this).  One mentioned he had politely sat down next to this professor on campus to talk to her about some of these issues, but again, refusal to engage in any discussion.   So much for the free exchange of ideas and all that.

Haven’t seen the video you’re referencing (would be great if you could post it), but I don’t think you will get much push back here that a UT professor ignoring a Jewish student attempting to participate in a discussion is a chickenshit move. Also, not acknowledging that Hamas is a terrorist organization. That professor should be publicly shamed if that’s true. 

[jimmyjazz 46099]

15 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

A college-aged kid wearing a mask outdoors due to covid fears in 2024 is really a thing? 

Or do you think there might be another reason they are wearing a mask at these outdoor protests?

 

There was literally a photo posted of a kid crossing a campus street last week, wearing a mask.  @Anastasis made his usual snarky response.

[Gene Parmesan 4014]

6 minutes ago, miguelito said:

What if I told you there was a way to simultaneously water the grass, disperse protestors, and improve the hygiene of protestors who refuse to leave?

[BabaYaga 15305]

5 minutes ago, Skipper said:

for some reason she noted that IDF forces trained the APD

huh?  As in active IDF military takes time to rotate across the ocean to work with Texas LEOs?  Or maybe retired military do training classes paid for and sponsored by municipalities like they do with retired SEALS, SF, etc?

[Leeroy Jenkins 2412]

15 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

A college-aged kid wearing a mask outdoors due to covid fears in 2024 is really a thing? 

Or do you think there might be another reason they are wearing a mask at these outdoor protests?

 

It is still a thing.  I saw several a few weeks ago when I was visiting my daughter.  I am not stupid and I agree that many are wearing them to help conceal their identity during these protest.  

[Skipper 6192]

5 minutes ago, royiv said:

Haven’t seen the video you’re referencing (would be great if you could post it), but I don’t think you will get much push back here that a UT professor ignoring a Jewish student attempting to participate in a discussion is a chickenshit move. Also, not acknowledging that Hamas is a terrorist organization. That professor should be publicly shamed if that’s true. 

Unfortunately it was just a livestream.  I was doing a search to see if anydrama was occurring today and came across it and got sucked in for a bit. Will look to see if any video later.  To be clear, most of what I could hear was very tame but definitely not open to any discussion around the edges and the point about the IDF and APD was just WTF.  The audio wasn't great so maybe I missed some context.

[Anastasis 23481]

11 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

There was literally a photo posted of a kid crossing a campus street last week, wearing a mask.  @Anastasis made his usual snarky response.

The one about the individual wearing a poor fitting N95 around while they walk outdoors with no one around them being performative? Yeah, that was me.